P.S. I sometimes wonder how things would be different if CAF had made it an "Eastern Catholicism" section right along, rather than making it the "Eastern Christianity" section for so long and then changing it suddenly.

That was the originally intended format - in fact, I think I recollect that it was briefly implemented under that title (real old-timers from CAF help me out, am I remembering correctly?).

Blame or credit, depending on your perspective, for the change of nomenclature goes to me in my alter ego of 'Joe Monahan', the original EC mod there. I successfully fought for the change to make it a more pan-Eastern environment, pointing out that ECs and EOs had more in common to discuss than either of us did with Latins or those of other faiths.

It seems to me (not speaking with any certainty here, just from reading-between-the-lines of what people say on this forum) that Orthodox generally want CAF to have an Eastern Christianity section.

At the very least, can we state the Orthodox side without being censored for it?

P.S. I sometimes wonder how things would be different if CAF had made it an "Eastern Catholicism" section right along, rather than making it the "Eastern Christianity" section for so long and then changing it suddenly.

That was the originally intended format - in fact, I think I recollect that it was briefly implemented under that title (real old-timers from CAF help me out, am I remembering correctly?).

Blame or credit, depending on your perspective, for the change of nomenclature goes to me in my alter ego of 'Joe Monahan', the original EC mod there. I successfully fought for the change to make it a more pan-Eastern environment, pointing out that ECs and EOs had more in common to discuss than either of us did with Latins or those of other faiths.

It seems to me (not speaking with any certainty here, just from reading-between-the-lines of what people say on this forum) that Orthodox generally want CAF to have an Eastern Christianity section.

At the very least, can we state the Orthodox side without being censored for it?

Not just for Orthodoxy. I find that many people are afraid to hear the side of others. I mean, if Catholicism is the truth, what can a Protestant or Orthodox say to sway people from their side to convert?

Not just for Orthodoxy. I find that many people are afraid to hear the side of others.

Tell me about it. It's like the people on OCnet who have no interest in anything Catholics (much less protestants) have to say.

But anyhow here's what I was driving at: Most of us here agree that the changes that happened at CAF, about a half-dozen years ago, were a big disappointment. (I have a friend who disagrees, but he's in a pretty small minority.) But I've never been able to figure out whether it would have been fine, from an Orthodox pov, if CAF had never had an Eastern Christianity section to begin with (as distinct from having it but then suddenly removing it).

Not just for Orthodoxy. I find that many people are afraid to hear the side of others.

Tell me about it. It's like the people on OCnet who have no interest in anything Catholics (much less protestants) have to say.

But anyhow here's what I was driving at: Most of us here agree that the changes that happened at CAF, about a half-dozen years ago, were a big disappointment. (I have a friend who disagrees, but he's in a pretty small minority.) But I've never been able to figure out whether it would have been fine, from an Orthodox pov, if CAF had never had an Eastern Christianity section to begin with (as distinct from having it but then suddenly removing it).

And that is the difficulty. Given that Eastern Catholics want to be "Orthodox in communion with Rome", how can there be an honest discussion about Eastern Catholicism without touching on Orthodox theology? That is why you get these RCs there telling ECs that they should believe everything the RC teaches instead of what Orthodoxy teaches. From the EC perspective, this impacts their own theology, at least in how it is discussed over at CAF and how people who only get exposed to ECs in that forum percieve the ECs.

You're right about the RCs telling the ECs, they should believe everything the Romans teach. I have even talked to some RCs (i.e. PJM) who cannot honestly understand why Eastern theology is so contradictory to what Rome teaches and yet they are still in "communion" with the Latin church.

Logged

Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith; Which faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the catholic faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity

You're right about the RCs telling the ECs, they should believe everything the Romans teach. I have even talked to some RCs (i.e. PJM) who cannot honestly understand why Eastern theology is so contradictory to what Rome teaches and yet they are still in "communion" with the Latin church.

Well, the claim is that "they are saying the same thing using different words."

I don't mind Latins telling us all that we should believe what they do (they don't just do this to Eastern Catholics, after all). In fact, I would question their commitment to their faith if they didn't do that. What I don't like is when I'm told repeatedly how my church and our fathers agree with the Latins or are sooooo much (more) like the Latins (than the EO are), and if I were really knowledgeable I would see that. Oh, and also the whole "my agreed statements -- let me show you them" thing. That is irritating in the extreme. The cherry-picking fathers is bad enough without the muddled world of modern ecumenism giving some people a sense of superiority about their apostasy.

...Mardukm, basically, is what I'm saying. I don't like Mardukm.

Not that I'm terribly fond of basically anyone else on that website, either. All my favorite people got banned or cut their posting down to once a month, it seems.

P.S. I sometimes wonder how things would be different if CAF had made it an "Eastern Catholicism" section right along, rather than making it the "Eastern Christianity" section for so long and then changing it suddenly.

That was the originally intended format - in fact, I think I recollect that it was briefly implemented under that title (real old-timers from CAF help me out, am I remembering correctly?).

Blame or credit, depending on your perspective, for the change of nomenclature goes to me in my alter ego of 'Joe Monahan', the original EC mod there. I successfully fought for the change to make it a more pan-Eastern environment, pointing out that ECs and EOs had more in common to discuss than either of us did with Latins or those of other faiths.

It seems to me (not speaking with any certainty here, just from reading-between-the-lines of what people say on this forum) that Orthodox generally want CAF to have an Eastern Christianity section.

At the very least, can we state the Orthodox side without being censored for it?

Once upon a time, long, long ago, one could. Those were the days ...

Many years,

Neil

Logged

"Not only is it unnecessary to adopt the customs of the Latin Rite to manifest one's Catholicism, it is an offense against the unity of the Church."

P.S. I sometimes wonder how things would be different if CAF had made it an "Eastern Catholicism" section right along, rather than making it the "Eastern Christianity" section for so long and then changing it suddenly.

That was the originally intended format - in fact, I think I recollect that it was briefly implemented under that title (real old-timers from CAF help me out, am I remembering correctly?).

Blame or credit, depending on your perspective, for the change of nomenclature goes to me in my alter ego of 'Joe Monahan', the original EC mod there. I successfully fought for the change to make it a more pan-Eastern environment, pointing out that ECs and EOs had more in common to discuss than either of us did with Latins or those of other faiths.

In the early days, it was relatively uncommon to see anyone, except ECs and EOs, post in that forum. Posts by either of us in other fora there were generally unappreciated, usually either ignored or met with responses along the line of "we're discussing the way 'Catholics' do things".

Many years,

Neil

It's the same thing today. I've been warned so many times for bringing up Eastern Catholicism in the Liturgy and Sacraments Forum which is for Western Sacraments (though the forum description never mentions it). And it's not like I'm saying "Eastern Sacraments are better". I'm just offering a different perspective to what the East believes and views the topic at hand.

Isn't that the plight of "Eastern Catholics" and "Orthodox United to Rome"?

Btw, I was banned from the "Liturgy and Sacraments" forum for calling them on the sanctimony of the Corban factories a/k/a the Vatican's marriage tribunals. IIRC, the topic came up from some cheap and facile attack on Orthodox discipline. The Mod, knowing that I couldn't respond, sent me a PM stating with all the authority of a petty tyrant, that I "certainly do not know anything about Catholic [sic] sacrament."

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.A hasty quarrel kindles fire,and urgent strife sheds blood.If you blow on a spark, it will glow;if you spit on it, it will be put out; and both come out of your mouth

I don't mind Latins telling us all that we should believe what they do (they don't just do this to Eastern Catholics, after all).

So we've got 2 different issues here: "Latins" on the one hand saying "You should believe what we believe" and on the other hand saying "If you want to be in communion with us, then you should/must believe what we believe". The problem comes in, however, when people treat the latter statement as being equally true for a Catholic-who-wants-to-stay-Catholic as for someone converting to Catholicism.

In fact, I would question their commitment to their faith if they didn't do that. What I don't like is when I'm told repeatedly how my church and our fathers agree with the Latins or are sooooo much (more) like the Latins (than the EO are),

I'm amazed every time that happens (well, maybe not so much anymore now that I've encountered it so many times). It's one thing (albeit still incorrect, but understandable) if people think that Catholics and EOs are very close and the OOs are far off, but ...

P.S. I sometimes wonder how things would be different if CAF had made it an "Eastern Catholicism" section right along, rather than making it the "Eastern Christianity" section for so long and then changing it suddenly.

That was the originally intended format - in fact, I think I recollect that it was briefly implemented under that title (real old-timers from CAF help me out, am I remembering correctly?).

Blame or credit, depending on your perspective, for the change of nomenclature goes to me in my alter ego of 'Joe Monahan', the original EC mod there. I successfully fought for the change to make it a more pan-Eastern environment, pointing out that ECs and EOs had more in common to discuss than either of us did with Latins or those of other faiths.

In the early days, it was relatively uncommon to see anyone, except ECs and EOs, post in that forum. Posts by either of us in other fora there were generally unappreciated, usually either ignored or met with responses along the line of "we're discussing the way 'Catholics' do things".

Many years,

Neil

It's the same thing today. I've been warned so many times for bringing up Eastern Catholicism in the Liturgy and Sacraments Forum which is for Western Sacraments (though the forum description never mentions it). And it's not like I'm saying "Eastern Sacraments are better". I'm just offering a different perspective to what the East believes and views the topic at hand.

Isn't that the plight of "Eastern Catholics" and "Orthodox United to Rome"?

Not always. In fact, 7 points of the Union of Brest were dedicated to the rights of Eastern Catholics on the internet.

I don't mind Latins telling us all that we should believe what they do (they don't just do this to Eastern Catholics, after all).

So we've got 2 different issues here: "Latins" on the one hand saying "You should believe what we believe" and on the other hand saying "If you want to be in communion with us, then you should/must believe what we believe". The problem comes in, however, when people treat the latter statement as being equally true for a Catholic-who-wants-to-stay-Catholic as for someone converting to Catholicism.

I'm not sure I understand the distinction you're making, Peter. I just meant that if those of the Roman communion are convinced that they are the Church, then it is right for them to tell everyone who is not in communion with them that they must believe in points X, Y, Z (i.e., whatever it is that is essential to union with Rome) in order to be in the Church. The Orthodox Church would certainly say the same to any who wished to become Orthodox: We believe X, so you have to believe X (not Y) if you want to join the Church.

I don't mind Latins telling us all that we should believe what they do (they don't just do this to Eastern Catholics, after all).

So we've got 2 different issues here: "Latins" on the one hand saying "You should believe what we believe" and on the other hand saying "If you want to be in communion with us, then you should/must believe what we believe". The problem comes in, however, when people treat the latter statement as being equally true for a Catholic-who-wants-to-stay-Catholic as for someone converting to Catholicism.

In fact, I would question their commitment to their faith if they didn't do that. What I don't like is when I'm told repeatedly how my church and our fathers agree with the Latins or are sooooo much (more) like the Latins (than the EO are),

I'm amazed every time that happens (well, maybe not so much anymore now that I've encountered it so many times). It's one thing (albeit still incorrect, but understandable) if people think that Catholics and EOs are very close and the OOs are far off, but ...

Thing is the Catholic Church has internally resolved the differences in belief between East and West. So no need for these overeager Latins to tell the ECs they are wrong when the hierarchy is telling them it is okay.

You mean the first distinction (between "You should believe what we believe" and "If you want to be in communion with us, then you should/must believe what we believe") or the second distinction (between a Catholic-who-wants-to-stay-Catholic and someone converting to Catholicism)? Seems to me that both distinctions are pretty undeniable.

You mean the first distinction (between "You should believe what we believe" and "If you want to be in communion with us, then you should/must believe what we believe") or the second distinction (between a Catholic-who-wants-to-stay-Catholic and someone converting to Catholicism)? Seems to me that both distinctions are pretty undeniable.

I agree with dzheremi, the second makes absolutely no sense to me. Converts and cradles in Orthodoxy share the same faith, why should it different for Catholicism?

You mean the first distinction (between "You should believe what we believe" and "If you want to be in communion with us, then you should/must believe what we believe") or the second distinction (between a Catholic-who-wants-to-stay-Catholic and someone converting to Catholicism)? Seems to me that both distinctions are pretty undeniable.

I agree with sheenj. What is the difference for a new convert to EC and one who is a cradle? They have the same faith. Now, is that faith expressed the same way as the Latins. As the Vatican has acknowledged, there are differences in traditions. Therefore those must be respected. These people in the forum asserting that ECs should do as they say is not respecting the differences in traditions.

P.S. I sometimes wonder how things would be different if CAF had made it an "Eastern Catholicism" section right along, rather than making it the "Eastern Christianity" section for so long and then changing it suddenly.

That was the originally intended format - in fact, I think I recollect that it was briefly implemented under that title (real old-timers from CAF help me out, am I remembering correctly?).

Blame or credit, depending on your perspective, for the change of nomenclature goes to me in my alter ego of 'Joe Monahan', the original EC mod there. I successfully fought for the change to make it a more pan-Eastern environment, pointing out that ECs and EOs had more in common to discuss than either of us did with Latins or those of other faiths.

In the early days, it was relatively uncommon to see anyone, except ECs and EOs, post in that forum. Posts by either of us in other fora there were generally unappreciated, usually either ignored or met with responses along the line of "we're discussing the way 'Catholics' do things".

Many years,

Neil

It's the same thing today. I've been warned so many times for bringing up Eastern Catholicism in the Liturgy and Sacraments Forum which is for Western Sacraments (though the forum description never mentions it). And it's not like I'm saying "Eastern Sacraments are better". I'm just offering a different perspective to what the East believes and views the topic at hand.

Isn't that the plight of "Eastern Catholics" and "Orthodox United to Rome"?

Not always. In fact, 7 points of the Union of Brest were dedicated to the rights of Eastern Catholics on the internet.

Yes, but Ultramontanism being what it is, it wasn't worth the paper it was written on as far as "rights of Eastern Catholics."

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.A hasty quarrel kindles fire,and urgent strife sheds blood.If you blow on a spark, it will glow;if you spit on it, it will be put out; and both come out of your mouth

You mean the first distinction (between "You should believe what we believe" and "If you want to be in communion with us, then you should/must believe what we believe") or the second distinction (between a Catholic-who-wants-to-stay-Catholic and someone converting to Catholicism)? Seems to me that both distinctions are pretty undeniable.

I agree with dzheremi, the second makes absolutely no sense to me. Converts and cradles in Orthodoxy share the same faith, why should it different for Catholicism?

It isn't. My wife is a cradle Catholic, I'm a convert. We share precisely the same faith.

Well, the claim is that "they are saying the same thing using different words."I realize they don't, that is why I'm Orthodox today.

Yes, me too, I could never figure out why the Vatican could come to an agreement on parallel theologies and claiming they are at one with each other.With this mindset and belief system I can envision making other exceptions with Anglicans, Lutherans and Episcopalians.

You mean the first distinction (between "You should believe what we believe" and "If you want to be in communion with us, then you should/must believe what we believe") or the second distinction (between a Catholic-who-wants-to-stay-Catholic and someone converting to Catholicism)? Seems to me that both distinctions are pretty undeniable.

I agree with dzheremi, the second makes absolutely no sense to me. Converts and cradles in Orthodoxy share the same faith, why should it different for Catholicism?

It isn't. My wife is a cradle Catholic, I'm a convert. We share precisely the same faith.

Yes, I'm familiar with your history. I know you joined the Catholic Church, then left Catholicism for Orthodoxy, then later left Orthodoxy for Catholicism. (Not that you ever claimed that I had a bad memory. )

So I went to CAF because someone sent me a PM (warms the heart that so many people love me despite my craziness). Then the forum has this message for me:

Hello ConstantineTG,

It appears that you have not posted on our forums in quite some time.

Well, duh!

I still get messages from them. In fact, I might have gotten a birthday greeting this year. I've got a couple of donation appeals.

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.A hasty quarrel kindles fire,and urgent strife sheds blood.If you blow on a spark, it will glow;if you spit on it, it will be put out; and both come out of your mouth

So I went to CAF because someone sent me a PM (warms the heart that so many people love me despite my craziness). Then the forum has this message for me:

Hello ConstantineTG,

It appears that you have not posted on our forums in quite some time.

Well, duh!

I still get messages from them. In fact, I might have gotten a birthday greeting this year. I've got a couple of donation appeals.

The message I got is from another user.

Funny if they ask for donations from people they ban maybe they should allow you to remit some of your suspension by paying some amount of money. A certain amount is equivalent to days of suspension time. Hhhmmm... why does this sound familiar?

So I went to CAF because someone sent me a PM (warms the heart that so many people love me despite my craziness). Then the forum has this message for me:

Hello ConstantineTG,

It appears that you have not posted on our forums in quite some time.

Well, duh!

I still get messages from them. In fact, I might have gotten a birthday greeting this year. I've got a couple of donation appeals.

The message I got is from another user.

Funny if they ask for donations from people they ban maybe they should allow you to remit some of your suspension by paying some amount of money. A certain amount is equivalent to days of suspension time. Hhhmmm... why does this sound familiar?

Yes, you may have hit on something here.........Heck I cant remember when I was excommunicated from CAF.

So I went to CAF because someone sent me a PM (warms the heart that so many people love me despite my craziness). Then the forum has this message for me:

Hello ConstantineTG,

It appears that you have not posted on our forums in quite some time.

Well, duh!

I still get messages from them. In fact, I might have gotten a birthday greeting this year. I've got a couple of donation appeals.

The message I got is from another user.

Funny if they ask for donations from people they ban maybe they should allow you to remit some of your suspension by paying some amount of money. A certain amount is equivalent to days of suspension time. Hhhmmm... why does this sound familiar?

That's the funniest thing I've read here in weeks.

Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides

It is rude and tasteless. But pray for them. Deliberate or not, it is just sad.

It's probably just whatever script they have that posts these messages do not take into account suspensions and banning. Maybe it is just a test scenario they overlooked when testing the system.

Yeah, or like those automated birthday wishes I get from every forum I ever signed up for. At least 3 different atheist forums still wish me a happy birthday even though I haven't posted at any of them for years.

Logged

"Sometimes, you just gotta say, 'OK, I still have nine live, two-headed animals' and move on.'' (owner of Coney Island freak show, upon learning he'd been outbid on a 5-legged puppy)

Yeah, or like those automated birthday wishes I get from every forum I ever signed up for. At least 3 different atheist forums still wish me a happy birthday even though I haven't posted at any of them for years.

It must be some evangelical doctrine they are trying to emulate:

Once an atheist - always an atheist.

Once saved - always saved.

If the first is true, I'm pretty much lost.

I'd like to believe the second, despite being convinced it's heretical.

It occurs to me, why hasn't this been quoted on this thread? "And why seest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye; and seest not the beam that is in thy own eye?" - Matthew 7:3

because CAF has wacked many of us in the eye with their beam.

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.A hasty quarrel kindles fire,and urgent strife sheds blood.If you blow on a spark, it will glow;if you spit on it, it will be put out; and both come out of your mouth

It occurs to me, why hasn't this been quoted on this thread? "And why seest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye; and seest not the beam that is in thy own eye?" - Matthew 7:3

because CAF has wacked many of us in the eye with their beam.

Ah, there we go. I just knew there was a reason that quote was relevant to a bunch of posters getting together on OCnet to talk about how-bad-caf-is. Now I know what it is.

to be fore-warned is to be fore-armed.

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.A hasty quarrel kindles fire,and urgent strife sheds blood.If you blow on a spark, it will glow;if you spit on it, it will be put out; and both come out of your mouth

Meh, I stopped following threads on CAF. All interesting posters are either banned or laying low. Only silly people who create threads like "I went to my first Byzantine Mass" are left.

Why do you consider them "silly"?

The names of those threads pretty much gives it away. And besides, they usually don't have enough knowledge to participate in interesting debates. Those debates were the main reason why I kept reading CAF.

Meh, I stopped following threads on CAF. All interesting posters are either banned or laying low. Only silly people who create threads like "I went to my first Byzantine Mass" are left.

Why do you consider them "silly"?

The names of those threads pretty much gives it away. And besides, they usually don't have enough knowledge to participate in interesting debates. Those debates were the main reason why I kept reading CAF.

True. Now it is just a round of, "It's not Mass, its Divine Liturgy." "Yes, you are Catholic you can receive Communion." "Follow what everyone else does." "You can cross yourself any which way you like." Etc.